How real is the risk of nuclear war?

There were no ultimatums in the last defend of India-Pakistan, no red buttons.

Still, the cycle of military revenge, veiled signals and Swift International Mediation quietly caused the most dangerous shadow in the region. The crisis did not deviate to the nuclear war, but it was a reminder of how fast the tension here could summon this ghost.

Even scientists have model how easily things can be unraveled. A 2019 survey by a global team of scientists found with a Nightmare where terrorist The attack on India’s parliament in 2025 triggered a nuclear exchange with Pakistan.

Six years later a Assertion of the real world “Although it is contained by a Termination of Fire of the United States On Saturday – overwhelmed fears of complete conflict. He also revived restless memories of how fragile stability in the region could be.

While the crisis escalates, Pakistan sent “double signals” – avenging military, while announcing a meeting of the national command body (NCA), a calculated reminder of its nuclear capacity. The NCA manages the control and potential use of the country’s nuclear arsenal. Whether this move was a symbolic, strategic or real signal, we can never know. It also came exactly as the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, has been reported to defame the spiral.

President Trump said, “nuclear conflict”S On Monday, in an address to the nation, the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said: “(there is) there is No nuclear blackmail tolerance; India will not be frightened by nuclear threats.

“Any terrorist safe shelter on this pretext will face accurate and determined strikes,” Modi added.

India and Pakistan Each owns about 170 nuclear weaponsAccording to the International Institute for Think-Tank (Sipri) Peace Study. As of January 2024, Sipri estimates that there are 12 121 nuclear warheads around the world. Of these, about 9,585 were conducted in military reserves, with 3,904 actively located – 60 more than the previous year. The US and Russia together represent more than 8,000 nuclear weapons.

Most of India and Pakistan’s arsenals are located in their land rocket forces, although they both develop nuclear triads capable of delivering war heads on land, air and sea, according to Christopher Clary, an expert on security at the University of Ollai in the United States.

“India probably has a larger air leg (an airplane capable of supplying nuclear weapons) than Pakistan. Although we know at least Pakistan’s naval foot, it is wise to consider India’s naval leg more advanced and more capable than Pakistan’s nuclear power,” he told the BBC.

One of the reasons, said Mr Clary, is that Pakistan has not invested anywhere near the “time or money” that India has in the construction of a nuclear energy submarine, giving India a “clear quality” advantage in naval nuclear capacity.

After testing nuclear weapons in 1998, Pakistan has never announced an official nuclear doctrine.

In contrast, India has adopted a first -class use policy after its own tests since 1998. But this position has shown signs of softening. In 2003, India kept Right to use nuclear weapons In response to chemical or biological attacks – effectively allowing first use under certain conditions.

A more ambiguity appeared in 2016 when then -Defense Minister Manohar Paririkar proposed India should not feel “tied” by politicsRaising questions about his long -term authenticity. (Parirrikar explained that this was his opinion.)

The absence of official doctrine does not mean that Pakistan is missing – official statements, interviews and nuclear developments offer clear clues to his operational stand, according to Sadia Taslim of Carnegie Fund for International Peace.

The nuclear threshold of Pakistan remains unclear, but in 2001 Khalid Kidwai – then head of the NCA Strategic Plans Division – outlined four red lines: major territorial loss, destruction of key military assets, economic strangulation or political destabilization.

In 2002, then President Perves Musharaf explained that “nuclear weapons were only aimed at India” and would only be used if “the very existence of Pakistan as a state” was at risk.

In his memoir, former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo writes that he was shaken at night to speak with an unnamed “Indian counterpart” who Was afraid Pakistan was preparing to use nuclear weapons During 2019 upholding with India.

About the same time, The Pakistani media quoted a senior employee Issuing a great warning to India: “I hope you know what it means (a national command body) and what it is. I said we will surprise you. Wait for this surprise … You have chosen a path of war without knowing the consequences of the peace and security of the region.”

During the Cargil War in 1999. The then Secretary of Pakistan Shamshad Ahmed warned that the country would not “Hesitate to use any weapon” to protect its territory. Years later, US employee Bruce Ridel revealed that intelligence shows that Pakistan is preparing his nuclear arsenal for deploymentS

But there is skepticism on both sides for such claims.

Former Indian Supreme Commissioner of Pakistan Ajay Bisaria writes in his memoir that Pompeo overestimates both the risk of nuclear escalation and the role of the United States to calm the conflict in 2019 and during Cargil, Pakistan “knew the Indian Air Force” And there is no real analysis.

“Strategic signaling reminds the world that any conflict can stop – with India and Pakistan, the bets are higher due to nuclear overhangs. But that does not mean that no country actively threatens nuclear use,” Lahor -based BBC told the BBC.

But nuclear escalation can happen by accident. “This can happen through human error, hackers, terrorists, computer failures, bad data from satellites and unstable leaders,” Prof. Alan Robock of Rutgers University, leading author of The Landmark 2019, told the BBC, a world team of scientists.

In March 2022 India accidentally fired a nuclear rocket with a cruise which has traveled 124 km (77 miles) in Pakistani territory before it collapses, reporting that it is damaging to civil property. Pakistan said India had failed to use the military hotline or issued a public statement for two days. If this happened during increased tension, the incident could turn into a serious conflict, experts say. (Months later the India government dismissed three Air Force Officers for “random rocket launch.”)

Still, the danger of a nuclear war remains “relatively small” between India and Pakistan, according to Clari.

“Until there is a large terrestrial battle along the border, the dangers of nuclear use remain relatively small and manageable,” he said.

“In the battle of the earth, the problem” Use it or lose it “is driven by the ability of your positions on Earth to be overcome by the enemy.” (S)“Use it or lose it“It refers to the pressure that an armed country may feel to launch its weapons before being destroyed at the first strike by an opponent.)

Sumit Ganguli, a senior associate at the Hoover University of Stanford University, believes that “neither India nor Pakistan want to be labeled as the first violator of Hiroshima’s nuclear taboo.”

“In addition, any country that resorts to the use of nuclear weapons would face significant revenge and suffer unacceptable casualties,” G -n Ganguli told the BBC.

At the same time, it seems that both India and Pakistan look like their nuclear arsenal.

With the new development systems in development, four plutonium reactors and expansion of uranium enrichment, Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal can reach about 200 warheads by the end of 2020, according to Nuclearstudied by the Nuclear Information Information Information Project by the Federation of American Scientists.

And since the beginning of 2023 India is thought to have about 680 kg of plutonium for a weapon – enough for Approximately 130-210 nuclear warheadsAccording to the international panel for dividing materials.

Despite repeated crises and close calls, both sides have so far managed to avoid a catastrophic rink in a nuclear conflict. “The deterrent is still holding. All Pakistanis have made to respond to conventional strikes with their own counter-conventional strikes” wrote UMER FAROQ, an analyzer based in Islamabad.

However, the presence of nuclear weapons injects a constant unit of risk – one that can never be completely excluded, no matter how much the guide or how much restrained intentions.

“When nuclear weapons can be involved, there is always an unacceptable level of danger,” said John Erat, Senior Director of Policy at the Non -Profit Center for Weapons Control and Non -Prolishment, before the BBC.

“The Indian and Pakistani governments have moved in these situations in the past, so the risk is small. But with nuclear weapons, even a small risk is too high.”